Considering Israel and the US are bombing Iran’s nuclear facilities because they have “weapons of mass destruction”, if Iran really did have such weapons, wouldn’t bombing the facilities they’re held in cause them to explode, or cause an evident ripple at least? I may be imagining this in a way cartoonier way than military weapons actually work, but I’m preparing myself for some incredibly annoying debates.

  • mhague@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    3 days ago

    Yes. The people in this thread are wrong. Bombing a nuke can set it off, just not fully.

    A nuke may require many precise detonations to function as intended. When everything goes right it will release it’s full power.

    When an external explosion hits the nuke, only some material should activate, causing a relatively tiny explosion. Shouldn’t be any real fallout.

    This assumes the designers specifically made the nuke to not go off from one explosion. There’s no rule that says you need to make nukes safe. People shouldn’t dismiss a partial detonation of a nuke like it’s nothing.

    Edit: look up “one-point safety.” Safer nukes are designed so very little happens when there’s eg an explosion. If nukes didn’t go off when bombed this wouldn’t be a thing.

    • dustyData@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      3 days ago

      One-point safety is about preventing a nuclear yield when one of the explosives inside the nuke go off by accident and not all of the detonation triggers. It does help to prevent accidental nuclear yield if the nuke is destroyed by an external explosion. But you’re understimaing how extremely difficult it is to initiate a nuclear fission event. Not only should all the trigger explosives go off, the fission material has to be hit by the explosion from the right place and in a correct sequence and timeframe. Else the fission won’t start.

      Bombs are even stored separate from the explosives sometimes, for extra safety. The biggest issue with these attacks is radioactive material contamination. The risk of a nuclear explosion from bombing a weapons development or storage site is one in billions.

      • mhague@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        3 days ago

        The internal explosive may malfunction from an external stimuli, such as a massive bomb detonation near it.

        One-point safety sets cutoffs for how much yield can be produced from a malfunction. That’s for countries experienced with nukes who had time to fix their catastrophic failures.

        Considering there’s many ways to design nukes, different countries have different technological capabilities, the answer isn’t a squeaky clean “No.” when someone asks if nukes can explode when bombed. Answers should have more gradation. And they shouldn’t imply a nuke in Iran wouldn’t catastrophically fail because sophisticated designs from countries allowed to have nukes have ironed out the wrinkles. Iran is smart and capable like any other country but they’re being badly stressed and their context is different than the traditional nuclear powers.

        • dustyData@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 days ago

          It may, but that is in armed and ready bombs. Nukes are stored with the explosives separate from the fissible material.

          That point is moot though. As we know Iran is still years away from a nuclear bomb, because Trump and Netanyahu are liars. As evidence by the fact there is no radioactive spill from the facilities destroyed. Either Iran didn’t have the material there yet, or they already built the bombs and they are stored elsewhere. The first scenario seems more likely.

  • NeatNit@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    4 days ago

    From my understanding, Iran doesn’t have nuclear weapons yet. What they destroyed is essentially a factory that creates one of the key ingredients required for making nuclear weapons. It’s not a weapon yet, and it’s not explosive yet. Iran’s still a ways away from making that.

    I super highly recommend William Spaniel on YouTube. He hasn’t covered this bombing yet (I’m sure he will within a few hours tomorrow), but a few days ago he did briefly go over the process of making nuclear bombs, you should check it out: https://youtu.be/XA1CQp_oJ90?t=480

    Either way it’s an amazing channel for understanding world affairs, I really can’t recommend it enough. Go watch any of his recent videos, they’re short and well worth it.

    • ryannathans@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      4 days ago

      US intelligence repeatedly states Iran is not building a nuclear weapon, and there is no evidence any actions have been related to a nuclear bomb since 2003. They do have nuclear power plants, heavy water plants, etc which enriched uranium is used for though. The US is so aware of this, that they buy heavy water from Iran.

      • apfelwoiSchoppen@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        4 days ago

        Iran is a member of the Treaty Against Nuclear Proliferation and as such has international oversight into its nuclear programs. If they actually did have a nuclear weapons program, Team America World Police and Israel wouldn’t be the ones telling the world. This is all a lie to bomb more brown people.

        FWIW, Israel has never signed this treaty.

      • gedaliyah@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 days ago

        Iran has consistently hid nuclear refinement facilities from international inspection, and there have been numerous reports of materials and facilities that serve no civilian purpose over the past 20 years, when such activity is in violation of international agreements.

  • db2@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    4 days ago

    No. That’s not how it works. It could spread nuclear material though.

    Edit: if it existed where they’re claiming, which it doesn’t.

    • spacecadet@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 days ago

      Pretty much the only people who claim it doesn’t exist is Iran. The only reason the UN can’t verify is because anytime they do surprise inspections they aren’t allowed into the facilities. No need to bury your refinement facilities 300 feet underground if you are making energy grade nuclear materials.

      • surewhynotlem@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 days ago

        No need to bury your refinement facilities 300 feet underground

        Unless your neighbors are crazy enough to try and bomb them.

        • spacecadet@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 days ago

          Yes, one day for no reason at all Israel decided to blow up Irans secret nuclear facilities.

            • spacecadet@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              3 days ago

              Iran has been threatening sine 79 for some reason, wonder what happened and if a certain ideology took over Iran?

              • surewhynotlem@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                2 days ago

                So then you agree that it makes sense for them to build the sites very deep even if they had no intent of making nukes. Became their neighbors are likely to try and blow it up.

                Glad we settled that